Conference Agenda

The conference agenda provides an overview and details of sessions. In order to view sessions on a specific day or for a certain room, please select an appropriate date or room link. You may also select a session to explore available abstracts and download papers and presentations.

 
Session Overview
Session
01-03: Inclusive Business Agreement: Are Benefits Shared?
Time:
Tuesday, 21/Mar/2017:
8:30am - 10:00am

Session Chair: Frits Van Der Wal, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Netherlands, The
Location: MC 2-800

Streaming.


Presentations

Doing (Inclusive) Business in Guinea Bissau: Re-activating the 1998 Land Law

Christopher Tanner1, Camille Bourguignon2

1Consultant in land policy and rural development; 2Senior Land Administration Specialist, the World Bank

This paper discusses the 1998 Land Law of Guinea Bissau and its relevance to address today’s land administration issues. The law was developed to reconcile customary land rights with a surging demand for land by private investors. It recognizes customary land rights and introduces mechanisms to allow investors to acquire Rights of Private Use. However, implementation of the 1998 Land Law was stopped by years of civil war and political instability. Following the election of 2014, the Government of Guinea Bissau intends to implement the 1998 Land Law as part of its rural and agricultural investment strategy. Circumstances have changed however, with massive expansion of cashew production after years of weak regulatory control. Some query the continuing relevance of the Land Law, but the authors argue that the underlying structural conditions are not significantly different than in the mid-1990s and that the need for the negotiated land access model of the 1998 Land Law is perhaps even greater than when it was developed.

01-03-Tanner-395_paper.pdf
01-03-Tanner-395_ppt.pptx

Food security narrative and its effects on land governance: Case study of agricultural policies for oil palm in Colombia

Gina Paola Rico Mendez

Mississippi State University, United States of America

This work builds upon a theory about the consolidation of state legitimacy given transformations in food security. Food security has shifted from prioritizing national food maximization effort to the provision of food to households and individuals, regardless of the production source. This phenomenon altered the formula for balance and control of a country’s territory; as agricultural output moved into a global context, urban centers became less reliant on its periphery for sustenance and central governments have fewer incentives to directly govern rural areas. Hence, the expansion of industrialized production led to increasing volume of international food exchanges and reliance on transnational networks for food provision. This decoupling of rural and urban areas leveraged a different form of governance in the periphery, which relies on negative legitimacy and the expansion of large-scale agriculture under public-private partnerships. Utilizing findings from Colombian agricultural policies for oil palm, before and after the 1990´s, this paper aims to illustrate the impacts of a change in the concept of food security and its effects on the administrative capacity in rural areas. Findings indicate that large scale agricultural policies and violence concentrated rural land ownership into export productive commodities and altered the structure of rural governance.

01-03-Rico Mendez-274_paper.pdf
01-03-Rico Mendez-274_ppt.pptx

Land, Mining And Prior Consultation Of Indigenous Peoples In Peru

Gabriel Sergio Arrisueno Fajardo1, Luis Miguel Triveno Chan Jan2

1Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Peru; 2The World Bank

In the last two decades, Peru has achieved sustained economic growth and a significant reduction of poverty. However, the country’s indigenous population, the second largest in Latin America, has historically been marginalized: In 2015, indigenous poverty was 70 percent higher than non-indigenous. Natural resources, the bedrock of Peru's economy, are also the main source of social conflict, usually linked to the interplay between mining rights granted by the State and precarious and unclear communal land rights. With inadequate contact with the communities, little knowledge of cultural and social norms and without much positive local impact to show, the value proposition from large companies from extractive industries has frequently been weak. The Prior Consultation Law, initially opposed by many in the mining sector and perceived as an ideologically driven initiative, has recently started to be implemented in mining projects. And there are early signs that it is delivering opposite results from what critics feared: projects that include this mechanism are moving forward without opposition from the surrounding communities. In this paper, we argue that further improvements to the prior consultation process could help prevent social conflict, promote indigenous rights, and accelerate the initiation of mining projects worth billions in private investment.

01-03-Arrisueno Fajardo-887_paper.pdf
01-03-Arrisueno Fajardo-887_ppt.ppt

Is This Really Benefit Sharing? Understanding Current Practices Around Community-Investor Agreements Tied to Land Investments

Kaitlin Cordes1, Tehtena Mebratu-Tsegaye1, Sam Szoke-Burke1, Lauren Waugh2

1Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment, United States of America; 2International Senior Lawyers Project

Communities located near land investments increasingly interact with investors who seek to sign a range of agreements with them. In theory, this is a positive development: guidelines for responsible land investments urge greater benefit-sharing with project-affected communities, including through the use of direct agreements between the investor and affected communities or their members. Yet little analysis has been undertaken to date on actual community-investor agreements linked to land investments, and most recommendations are instead drawn from the extractive industries, where community development agreements have a longer history but serve a potentially different role. This gap in analysis leaves stakeholders without a clear understanding of existing practices, and without evidence-based guidance for improving future agreements.

This paper highlights the “state of play” around community-investor agreements tied to land investments. It also provides substantive and process-oriented recommendations that can be used by communities, investors, and other relevant actors to avoid common pitfalls and improve future agreements. The paper is based on an examination of over 50 community-investor agreements tied to land investments in eight countries; a review of investor-state contracts for corresponding investments; desktop research; and expert and stakeholder interviews.

01-03-Cordes-632_paper.pdf
01-03-Cordes-632_ppt.ppt